WI: Charles V folds to Marcel's demands?

Dorozhand

Banned
In 1357, the future Charles V of France was faced with the disaster of Poitiers and called the Estates-General to gather money for the country's defense. Popular disaffection with the nobility, due to the perception that they had betrayed the king during the battle, resulted in the dauphin and his decidedly aristocratic network of ministers becoming the central object of public blame for the misfortunes.

The assembled bourgeoisie of Paris, led by the urban philanthropist Étienne Marcel, boldly demanded of the dauphin a list of 61 articles, giving the Estates-General among other things the power to approve all taxes, freely assemble, and appoint the king's central advisors.

While Charles did sign the ordinance at first, the still living King Jean II heard of this and renounced the ordinance, diminishing the momentum and support of Marcel's movement, while the dauphin was able to pacify Paris. Marcel, however, was able to collaborate with Charles the Bad, who claimed the throne of France as the country teetered on the brink of civil war.

The situation arrived at the edge of the precipice when Marcel and a crowd of 3,000 tradespeople marched on Paris and occupied the royal palace, murdering two of Charles' ministers in front of his eyes.

Marcel, however, lost all support from the lower nobility with this incident and further alienated his bourgeois allies by his support of the "Jacquerie" peasant rebellion.

I find it fascinating how close France seems to have been to a full-blown social revolution in this moment, or at least to a parliamentary system; though unlike the English event this was the doing of the bourgeoisie rather than the aristocracy.

Do you think Marcel could have come out on top? Do you think his movement could have been the spark of an early revolution, even a kickstart for an early arising of bourgeois revolutions on the subcontinent? If this is the case, then war might be a long term prospect for France, although this doesn't exactly change much given the situation with England as it already stands. Perhaps he would simply have placed Charles the Bad on the throne, everyone shouts "long live the king" and the issue is done with. Perhaps this ends as the entire royal family and the concept of royalty itself lies in a pool of blood on the palace floor; the spectre of social rebellion released into all the world by its sacrifice. Who knows? What might the results of this parliamentary victory be, in any case?
 
Last edited:
Top